Are some in Westminster suffering from a touch of “Emperor’s new clothes” syndrome? I only ask as this week the Commons again voted against a move to provide extra money for the Financial Assistance Scheme (FAS), set up to help workers who lost their pensions because their firms went bust before 2005.

It is abundantly clear that the FAS is failing. Just weeks ago, as Gordon Brown was settling in at 10 Downing Street, a report from the FAS showed that in the two years since it was set up, the scheme has spent more on administration costs than it has paid out to workers left in dire straits after their pension pots turned out to be empty. About 125,000 workers and pensioners are in this position but the scheme has managed to make payments to fewer than 2,000 people.

Yet government ministers tell us everything is fine. While in the fairytale, the emperor was brought to his senses by the truthful utterance of a small boy, the Government still seems to have its fingers in its ears. It has been told that the FAS is inadequate not just by pension campaigners, but by two Commons select committees, the Parliamentary Ombudsman and a High Court judge. Ministers twice have been put under pressure by a cross-party group of MPs to set up a “lifeboat” fund to get cash to these beleaguered pensioners quickly. The plan was defeated in the Commons in April. The Lords later approved the scheme, but it was defeated again in the Commons this week. The Government has now used its veto to ensure the plans are not bounced back to the Lords once more.

In addition, the Government, unhappy at the High Court’s decision that it had been wrong to ignore the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s findings, appealed against the decision. The case will come to the Court of Appeal next week. Maybe if MPs can’t get this sorted, the courts can. But meanwhile, the workers are still waiting. The 10,000 who are already past retirement age are being forced to live on diminished means as they wait for their money. Some have already died.

These workers listened to the Government when it guaranteed the safety of their pensions. The Government must now listen to them.

Spread your wings and reevaulate your investments

If you have always fancied a trip down the red carpet but don’t happen to be related to, engaged to, or friends with any celebrities, then being a showbiz angel could be the answer. If music is your thing, you can back up-and-coming bands for as little as a fiver, as we explain on the opposite page. Who knows, you could find yourself as a guest on their table at the Mercury Music Awards.

But if musicals and theatre float your boat, turn to page 6 to find out how to become a backer.

Of course, this type of investment comes with a massive wealth warning. There are no guarantees. You may strike it lucky, and back the next U2. Or you could end up investing in a turkey of a play or musical which receives awful reviews, closes after a week, and takes all your money down the tubes with it.

But while showbiz angels might be happy to take that risk, tens of thousands of more conservative investors who stashed their money in funds, expecting to receive stellar returns, have been disappointed.

Private investors have locked away more than £12 billion in “dog” funds, says Bestinvest, the independent financial adviser. And we are not talking about the pampered pooches you see peeking out of designer handbags here, but rather the investment funds that have failed to beat their benchmark index in each of the past three years, and have underperformed the index by at least 10 per cent over that time.

Experts say that recent market turbulence has swollen the number of funds that qualify. Last January there was about £3.3 billion invested in 38 funds named as dog funds. Now 72 funds are on the list, holding £12.6 billion. To find the full list of dog funds, and the best performing funds in their sectors, visit timesonline.co.uk/funds.

And if you have money in a dog fund, now is the time to reevaluate your investments. While there is nothing much that showbiz angels can do about a bad script or dud musicians, switching out of a poorly performing fund is child’s play.

Banks shed crocodile tears about a very profitable delay

The faster payments system, designed to speed up banking transactions so that we can make electronic transfers of money in a matter of hours rather than days, has been, er, delayed. The new system, which was due to be introduced this November, would have brought us up to speed with many of our European counterparts who can transfer money to their own or other accounts on the same day. But we will now have to wait until some time next year for this service as the testing of the system is taking longer than expected.

The banking industry says it is “disappointed that we won’t be able to deliver the new, faster payments system as quickly as we planned”. I do sympathise. It must be difficult to stall the introduction of a system which will force it to forgo the estimated £30 million a year it makes from delays in the electronic transfer system.

Which?, the consumer group, says it is “even more disappointed than the banking industry. Consumers will continue to lose out because of this.” Quite.